Development of Country Scenarios

The scenario building of countries is based on the use the of the data of the social, economic and political environments that are interpreted considering the conceptual structure of a country that is given by its archetype. The building of future scenarios requires the additional use of the conceptual structure of economic growth, social growth and the concept of the dominant ideologies. In order to build future scenarios it is necessary to accept that the past and the future are not symmetric, unless the evolution of a country is stagnated.

The understanding of the archetype of a country is the first step to build a scenario.

What are Unicist Country Archetypes?

Unicist Country Archetypes are the structure of fundamentals that define the behavior of a culture.

The functionality of the archetype is driven by the structure of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature. Therefore a country archetype has a purpose, an active function and an energy conservation function.

If you study the history of a country you will find a structural behavior that hardly changes, producing the evolution or involution of the culture based on two aspects:

The change of the external environment where the culture has to live.

The change produced by the members of the culture.

When you enter deeply in the history of a country, which is the way to try to discover the nature of a culture defined by its archetypes, you will see that the majority of the changes happens at an operational level and not at a structural level.

Considering the Roman Empire you will see that it developed extremely slowly from the original tribes to an Empire and then evolved from an Empire to what it is today.

Hundreds of years are necessary for an archetype to evolve if the conditions of evolution are given. Involution is faster than evolution, but it also demands hundreds of years.

The values of cultures are implicit in the values of their elites. Therefore the understanding of the archetype of a culture implies researching the evolution of their establishment and the facts that were produced.

To define an ontological structure of a culture, which describes its fundamentals, it is necessary to find the hypothesis in its past, validate it with the facts of the present and falsify it with future forecasts based on its nature.

To explain this more operationally, some structural patterns for cultural behavior will be found by understanding the establishments of the cultures in the past. These patterns are in fact the operational concepts that are implicit in a country.

Operational concepts describe the myths that rule social behavior and the trade-offs that are made by the utopias that are posed by the participants of a culture.

When the operational concepts have been found the implicit purposes of their actions must be found.

The purposes are never those declaimed by the “actors”, they are those produced by the “actors”.

The purposes we are researching are not the operational objectives of actions but the structural results of the actions considered at a conceptual level.

It has to be considered that the real purposes of a culture are taboos that can only be shared by those who are able to influence them.

For the rest of the society they are mixed up with the operational objectives considering them as the real objectives.

The real objectives of a culture are those that are behind and guide the actions of the whole society. Basically, they are cross-cultural because they respond to the natural basic needs of people.

The active function of a society is materialized by the establishment and represented by the elite. This active function is observable, it can be measured.

The patterns of these actions are limited by the myths of a society. Paradoxically, the myths are implicit in the values of the middle class.

The middle class needs an external structure to be able to ascend socially. The myths are the energy conservation function and sustain the objectives, avoiding that the utopias posed by the elite change the real purpose of a society.

The final purpose of a social organization is the wellbeing of a society. This wellbeing can be considered as the ultimate goal in any society.

But it has to be considered that there are societies that do not include in their structure some of their members. In the ancient Greek democracy, slaves were not part of the social structure.

Archetypes define the power of a country

Cultural archetypes define the power of a culture and the ethics and gravitational forces the culture uses to sustain that power.

Power is defined in physics as the amount of work done or energy converted per unit of time.

Cultural power is the capacity a country has to make things happen. Power implies a measure of speed.

Country archetypes emulate the functionality of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature and evolve following the rules of the Unicist Theory of Evolution.

The purpose of a Unicist Country Archetype is to sustain and build power to influence the environment, its active function is the ethics of the culture and its energy conservation function is the gravitational force the culture uses to ensure the minimum strategies.

This explains the different influences of countries and the difference in the development of countries.

Four different functional levels of archetypes that produce different amounts of power for their countries have been discovered:

Surviving Archetype

Subsistent Archetype

Expansive Archetype

Influential Archetype

1) Surviving Archetype

Surviving cultures are driven by surviving ethics.

Surviving ethics implies that the objective of the culture is to survive. Its actions are basically to appropriate value from the environment and the operational myth that sustains this appropriation is the need to hold things, to own and dominate something.

Surviving archetypes suffer from a structural lack of power. Their energy is focused on surviving and therefore their value adding energy is extremely low.

Within an archetype there are sub-archetypes that have the same structure of the archetype but are limited by the energy the archetype can provide.

Their maximal strategy that allows them to aim at evolution is driven by forced catalysts and personal synergy.

This means that surviving archetypes are unable to manage the catalysts that are natural to the environment but substitute them with the use of power in order to force evolution.

This is based on personal synergy. Heroic actions are their natural way to evolve.

Heroic actions allow surviving archetypes to achieve the next step if they succeed. That is why they need charismatic and smart leaders that really know what is happening.

Their minimum strategy is given by the use of inhibitors to avoid dysfunctional actions and, based on the natural individualism of survivors, force a synergy that is needed.

This generates a conflict because a forced synergy implies a forced absolute ideology that divides the culture between those who follow it and those who reject it. There is no place for intermediate positions. Intermediate positions are considered oppositions.

Surviving Archetypes Involution

When the minimum strategy fails there is a need to survive and the culture enters a position of stagnation in order to find the power to evolve.

When a culture involves to a stagnated survivor archetype it develops the necessary justifications to exert all the power they have to profit from others. They need to transfer costs and risks to others in order to survive.

They enter in a “vicious circle” in which they need to transfer their problem to others and because they transfer the problem to others they cannot be an active member of their community.

Surviving Archetypes Evolution

Surviving archetypes evolve if they are able to begin adding value to the environment in order to generate integration with it.

Their maximal strategy prevails and they are able to introduce the generation of added value in their ethics. It has to be considered that the value added has to be judged by the market and not by the provider. Value added is what others consider one is adding.

In that case they enter a new stage of evolution, which is the subsistent archetype.

2) Subsistent Archetype

The subsistent archetypical cultures are driven by the earned value ethics.

It implies that their actions are basically driven by a value adding action in order to obtain a benefit and avoid degrading into a surviving archetype.

As it was said an archetype has in it the different archetypes that foster its evolution, stagnation and involution.

The value adding actions require having the necessary power to exert actions that generate added value in order to obtain the counterpart.

Subsistent archetypes tend to avoid poverty based on their capacity to gain value, minimizing the costs as far as they can.

They are natural followers of leaders and their ideologies are strongly social driven.

The members of subsistent archetypical cultures are driven by their “identification with the victim”. This makes them appear as being extremely cooperative with all the community, but in fact they are only cooperative with those who are victims.

They tend to avoid cooperation among peers unless they are threatened by an external situation.

Their maximal strategy is driven by the need to grow.

To do so they work within a strong ideological environment that produces the entropy inhibiting catalysts that ensure that the actions follow the purpose of growing.

Their synergy is based on social identification and this implies that they have a need to share.

Social sharing implies sharing the myths and the fallacious myths of a culture. Fallacious myths are beliefs built to hide the weaknesses a group or society cannot handle.

This necessarily implies developing social activities to share these myths in order to be accepted. Those who do not accept them need to be banished.

Minimum strategies need to ensure the survival of the subsistent based on a strong will-driven action to force growth and the development of synergy based on the personal relation among the members.

Subsistent Archetype’s Involution

Involution is produced if the growth cannot be achieved and there is no social mobility in a society. In this case the subsistent culture splits into two segments.

An elite, that remains in the subsistent segment, and the mass, that unavoidably enters into a surviving attitude. This necessarily degrades the habits of the society.

Degradation implies that individual needs prevail over social needs. When societies suffer involution crisis repeatedly, they end degrading into a lower state.

Subsistent Archetype’s Evolution

The evolution is produced when the purpose of the society changes to generate added value for its environment.

This implies entering the ethics of value adding which implies that the benefit is the consequence of generating value.

This evolution can only be produced based on a structural crisis where the participants find the energy to surpass the line from contraction to expansion, which means from security to freedom.

Therefore the evolution of the subsistent archetype is produced when the elite develops a higher level of internal freedom which implies a higher level of external responsibility.

The next stage of evolution implies achieving expansion as the basic attitude of the culture.

3) Expansive Archetype

The cultures that are installed in the expansive archetype deal naturally with value adding as an attitude. The dominant ethical level of this culture is the value adding ethics.

This implies a high level of awareness of their actions in order to be able to generate increasing amounts of added value.

This archetype includes natural continuous improvement in order to develop better solutions than the existing ones.

Value adding implies accepting the judgment of the other part for the value received. It also implies a leading position considering the survival and subsistent archetypes, which necessarily drive to a competition with them.

Expansive archetypes are natural leading cultures. They are the ones that establish the standard in the field they are expansive. Therefore they are natural competitors in “exporting” standards and products.

They are solidary but are not identified with the victim. They accept that everyone’s responsibility is to produce added value and profit from it. Losers are not welcome because they degrade the culture.

Their maximal strategy is driven by an institutional approach to their activities.

This institutionalization implies working with operational catalysts to maximize the speed of the generation of value. And it also implies trying to cover the weaknesses based on a supplementary synergy.

Operational catalysts are accelerators installed in the operational processes, whatever their kind. Supplementary synergy implies that the competition is fostered.

Success is the value to be shared and the admiration of the authority, as a concept, drives their action. As they need to expand based on an institutional approach what they do has to be true.

Minimum strategy is driven by growth. Expansive cultures cannot imagine the absence of growth. Therefore their minimum strategy is to ensure growth.

To achieve this goal they avoid the entropy of their members using entropy inhibiting catalysts and they ensure the production of growth based on a strong social synergy.

Their nationalism is extremely strong based on their adding value attitude and capacity.

Expansive Archetype’s Involution

The involution of the expansive archetype is produced by:

-External factors, when the added value generated doesn’t respond to the needs of the environment.

-Internal factors, when the expansive culture enters in distributionism. Distributionism is the decision to distribute among the members of a society at the expense of the common good.

When involution or the fear of involution prevails in an expansive culture the immediate response is the growth of addictions. They higher the uncertainty of growth the more stable the addictive behavior becomes installed.

Expansive Archetype’s Evolution

The evolution of an expansive culture happens when this culture achieves a superior level of technology, education and long term planning.

When individuals are able to pay prices today in order to obtain benefits tomorrow a higher level of social behavior can be expected.

The long term conceptual planning is essential to achieve the next level because it implies a higher level of internal freedom, and internal freedom can only be functional if the final purpose is being managed.

Elites need to develop an ethics driven approach in their social role in order to achieve the next stage of evolution.

4) Influential Archetype

The influential archetype is the maximal level a society can achieve. It means that the culture is able to influence the environment while it adapts to it in an active way: Influencing while being influenced.

This requires a society with an elite with an extreme level of awareness and being able to pay the prices of sustaining such level of awareness that necessarily produces division among the members of the culture.

These societies are knowledge driven, being able to generate added value for the short and long term needs. They include a high proportion of avant-garde members who are recognized as the heroes of this society, but establishment heroes are the ones that ensure the future of the society.

Their maximal strategy implies generating value based on the integration of functional catalysts that are able to accelerate the value generation and thus increase the amount of work produced.

The synergy of influential cultures is based on complementariness. This implies the integration of complementary strengths.

These cultures are able to deal with the conflicts that complementariness produces without being involved in dysfunctional activities.

The minimum strategy is given by the capacity of institutionalized behavior. They submit individual free-will to the needs of institutional behavior.

To do so they use operational catalysts to ensure the fulfillment of institutional and individual needs while they cover their weaknesses with a supplementary synergy.

Influential Archetype’s Involution

The involution of the influential cultures is driven by the need to distribute what the society has achieved.

As soon as the distribution covers the needs of those who did not participate in the production of wealth, and this process becomes stable, the society degrades and splits into parts.

It has to be considered that this archetype is the maximal archetype that can be achieved and therefore it can be expected that it involves.

When this involution happens in a segmented way, it can be internally managed in the culture. When this involution is being influenced by external conditions it can produce a faster degradation of the archetype.

Influential Archetype’s Evolution

The evolution of this archetype implies that the internal segmentation in influential, expansive, subsistent and surviving segments is optimized.

There are always participants in all the segments. Evolution implies reducing the participants in the low energy segments and evolving towards a society with more members in the higher segments.

Conclusion:

The archetype of a Nation defines its power. But archetypes evolve, and this evolution occurs driven by the elite of a country. Elites have two roles in a country. On the one hand, they are the representatives of the archetype of the culture and, on the other hand, they are the ones that foster its evolution.